Sher Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4492 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
             ON THE 10th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021
                          BEFORE




                                                          .
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,





                   ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
                             &





          HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA

             CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 5190 of 2021





      Between:-

      SHER SINGH
      S/O SHRI SHANKAR DASS,

      RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BAROG,
      P.O. NANKHARI,

      TEHSIL NANKHARI,
      DISTRICT SHIMLA,
      H.P.
                                             .....PETITIONER



      (BY SH. AJAY SHARMA, SENIOR ADVOCATE
      WITH MR. AJAY THAKUR, ADVOCATE)




      AND





    1. HIMACHAL ROAD TRANSPORT
       CORPORATION LTD.,
       OLD BUS STAND,
       CART ROAD,





       SHIMLA-171003,
       THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
    2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER,
       H.R.T.C. SHIMLA-1 REGION,
       TARADEVI,
       SHIMLA 171010.
                                         .....RESPONDENTS

      (BY SH. VIR BAHADUR VERMA, ADVOCATE)
____________________________________________________




                                         ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:03:15 :::CIS
                                       2



              This writ petition coming on for admission this day,

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath, passed the following:




                                                                 .
                               ORDER

The parties are ad idem that the issue in question is

no longer res integra in view of the judgment rendered by a

Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.3050 of 2014, titled

Nek Ram Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others,

decided on 17.07.2014.

2. to Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed off on the

basis of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid judgment.

3. Consequently, the respondents are directed to pay all

retiral benefits to the petitioner within a period of six months

from today. However, it is made clear that in case the retiral

benefits are not paid to the petitioner within the aforesaid time,

then in addition to the due statutory benefits, the petitioner

shall also be paid interest at the rate of 9% per annum beyond

the period of six months till the date of payment.

( Ravi Malimath ) Acting Chief Justice

( Jyotsna Rewal Dua ) Judge September 10, 2021 (rohit)